Legislators in Connecticut voted for a ban so-called “assault” weapons, a ban on private party sales of used guns, creates a new “ammunition eligibility certificate,” and mandates a ban on the manufacture or sale and a registry for high capacity magazines. Do these buffoons have any concept of how many millions of magazines larger that 10 round capacity exist, or that virtually none of them carry a serial number?, says James Rawles in this article, Connecticut Gun Owners Betrayed by Their State Legislature, at Survival Blog.
I hope that Connecticut gun owners as well as gun, ammo and magazine makers vote with their feet. There are a lot of gun-related companies there: Colt, Winchester, Marlin (which recently shut down after 141 years of operation in Connecticut), Mossberg, Sturm-Ruger, H&R, Stag Arms, A.H. Fox, US Fire Arms, Wildey, Shelton Ammunition, Okay Industries, Ronan/NHMTG, C-Products, Mec-Gar, G.T.B., and many more. James Rawles at survivalblog.com
Emily Miller at the Washington Times summarizes the incredible details of Connecticut’s new gun law. Warning – it’s extreme, bordering on insanity from the insanity side of the border.
Remus says – An AP article tells us “House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, who helped craft the bill, said he realizes the gun owners are unhappy with the bill, but he stressed that no one will lose their legally owned guns or magazines under the legislation.” Note two things. First, we truly have a two party one-party system. Republicans revealed their craven ways again, they were fully on board with this. When the vote was taken, gun owners had no representation, the collectivists knew this, consequently there were no concessions, not even to reality.
In Connecticut, we’ve broken the mold. Democrats and Republicans were able to come to an agreement on a strong, comprehensive bill. That is a message that should resound in 49 other states and in Washington, D.C.
Senate President Williams Jr., via Susan Haigh, AP at news.yahoo.com
Second, note the legaleese “no one will lose their legally owned guns or magazines.” The banning of this or that is not the point. Laws create criminals where none were before, that is the intent of law. Connecticut now has a whole new criminal class: gun owners. Background checks? How long before even wanting a gun is evidence of dangerous mental instability?
It takes a twisted sense of humor for Connecticut to call itself the Constitution State. Somewhere, Nathan Hale is puking.
I am so satisfied with the cause in which I have engaged, that my only regret is, that I have not more lives than one to offer in its service. Nathan Hale, via Independent Chronicle and the Universal Advertiser, May 17, 1781